CLASSIFICATION of LAKE EYRE LANGUAGES Peter Austin 1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CLASSIFICATION OF LAKE EYRE LANGUAGES Peter Austin 1. Introduction1 The genetic classification of Australian Aboriginal languages has been a topic of heated debate among linguists over the past thirty years. The first attempt at a comprehensive classification for the whole continent was that proposed by O’Grady, Voegelin and Voegelin 1966 (see also O’Grady, Wurm and Hale 1966) using the lexicostatistical method. This classification claimed that all Australian languages were members of a single phylum and that there were twenty nine “phylic families” represented on the continent. One of these, Pama-Nyungan, covers the southern eight-tenths of the continent. A revised version of the classification was published by Wurm (1972) who reduced the number of families to twenty six (see also Wurm and Hattori 1982). Over the past ten years these classifications has been increasingly subjected to scrutiny. Dixon (1980:262ft) voiced strong criticism of the lexicostatistical classifications and claimed to have established a genetic classification (using traditional comparative-historical techniques) whereby all Australian languages, with the exception of Tiwi and Djingili, form a single genetic family and derive from a single ancestor proto-Australian (pA) (Dixon 1980:225). He argues that the distinction between Pama-Nyungan (PN) and non-Pama- Nyungan (nonPN) proposed by O’Grady, Hale and Wurm is not genetic but a typological and areal one. He says that “should not be inferred that PN is in any sense a genetic unity - that there was a proto-PN, as an early descendant of pA” (Dixon 1980:236). Dixon’s views have been challenged by Blake (1989, 1990) who compared verb pronominal prefix forms in a range of non-Pama-Nyungan languages and has been able to argue for reconstructing a prom-Northern system from which the attested nonPN systems evolve. According to Blake’s proposal, PN and nonPN are genetic labels. Evidence from lexical comparisons presented in Evans 1989 supports Blake’s position. Dixon (p.c. 1988) has accepted the arguments put forward by Blake and Evans and now agrees that Pama-Nyungan is a valid genetic label. While this work on higher level groupings has been a major focus of research and discussion, there have been relatively few published studies of lower level subgroups within Pama- Nyungan languages. The exceptions are Austin (1981, 1988) who considers the Kanyara and Mantharta languages of Western Australia, Black (1980) the Norman-Pama subgroup of Paman (see also Hale 1976), and Evans (1985) the Tangkic languages of the Gulf of Carpentaria. It is remarkable that little progress to date has been made in “bottom-up” language comparison and the delineation of detailed subgrouping within PN. This paper is an attempt to classify genetically the languages traditionally spoken in the region around Lake Eyre (northern South Australia) and to reconstruct the ancestor languages from which they descend. I will argue that a close genetic relationship can be demonstrated for the languages spoken to the east of Lake Eyre, and that these languages are more distantly related to Pitta-Pitta of central-western Queensland and Wangkumarra of south-western Queensland (into a grouping that can be called “Karnic”). I will propose a set of 1 Research for this paper was supported by a grant from the Australian Research Council; I am grateful to Pia Herbert for her research assistance, especially for typing up the Reuther comparative vocabulary materials. Thanks are also due to Gavan Breen and Luise Hercus for allowing me access to their unpublished materials on Lake Eyre languages. Philip Jones assisted with obtaining copies of sections of the Reuther manuscript. reconstructions for three levels of the Karnic group. I then examine data on languages spoken to the west of Lake Eyre (Wangkangurru and Arabana) and argue that, contrary to suggestions by Breen and Hercus, these languages are not particularly closely related to the eastern Lake Eyre languages and that shared cognates are either due to local borrowing or to common inheritance from a more distant ancestor, probably at a time depth close to Pama- Nyungan. This paper is thus an exercise in detailed genetic reconstruction and subgrouping for a local geographical region of Australia. Hopefully, further studies will illuminate other higher level groupings between the reconstructions proposed here and Pama-Nyungan itself. 2. The Lake Eyre Languages The region around Lake Eyre was traditionally one of some linguistic diversity. The following is a list of the ten languages (and sources of data on them) from the east of Lake Eyre considered in this study: 1. Thirrari (abbreviated as Ti) - spoken on the southern and eastern shores of Lake Eyre. Data sources are Austin 1974-77, 1981, Reuther 1981, MS; 2. Diyari (Di) - spoken east of Thirrari along the lower reaches of Cooper Creek. Sources are Austin 1974-77, 1981, Reuther 1981, MS; 3. Ngamini (Ng) - spoken north of Diyari along the lower Diamantina River. Sources are Breen 1971, Breen 1976a, Austin in prep, Reuther 1981, MS (Reuther’s data is indicated as NgR in the discussion below); 4. Karangura (Kn) - spoken north of Ngamini along the Diamantina River to Birdsville. The meagre data on this language is fully examined in Austin (in press); 5. Yarluyandi (Yl) - spoken north of Karangura to the Mulligan River in western Queensland. Data comes from fieldnotes and tapes collected by Austin and Breen (see also Austin (in prep)); 6. Mithaka (Mi) - spoken east of Yarluyandi in south-west Queensland. There is very little data on this language - see Breen 1971, 1976a (also Austin’s transcriptions of Breen’s Mithaka fieldtapes); 7. Karuwali (Ka) - traditionally spoken north and east of Mithaka. There is no contemporary data on this language and only two old written sources: Curr 1886, W.H.W. 1912; 8. Yawarrawarrka (Yw) - spoken east of Karangura and Ngamini in the extreme north- east of South Australia. Data on this language comes from Breen 1971. The Yawarrawarrka recorded by Reuther 1981, MS is a slightly different dialect than that recorded by Breen. It is indicated as YwR in the following; 9. Yandrruwandha (Ya) - spoken south of Yawarrawarrka and east of Diyari. There is a large amount of data on this language collected primarily by Breen - see Breen 1971, 1975, 1 976b, 1981, 1990, and Kerwin and Breen 1981, 1986. Data on slightly different dialects of Yandrruwandha was collected by Wurm 1957, and Reuther 1981, MS (indicated as YaR below); 10. Pirlatapa (N) - spoken south of Yandrruwandha and east of Diyari. The slight amount of data on this language has been thoroughly examined in Austin 1990. To the north and west of Lake Eyre were spoken Arabana (Ar) and Wangkangurru (Wn). These are shown to be closely related languages by Hercus 1990. Other sources of data are O’Grady and Klokeid 1968-69, and Reuther 1981, MS. South of Lake Eyre were a number of languages that appear to be closely related. I have considered data on the following: 1. Adnyamathanha (Ad) - spoken in the northern Flinders Ranges. Data comes from Coulthard and Schebeck 1987, Schebeck 1987, O’Grady 1967; 2. Pankarla (Pa) - spoken south and west of Adnyamathanha. There is a brief vocabulary in Hale 1960; 3. Nugunu (Nu) - spoken south of Pankarla near Port Augusta. Data comes from O’Grady 1958/60; 4. Narangga (Na) - spoken south of Pankarla. Data comes from O’Grady 1958. Two groups of more distant languages are considered in this study. To the north of the eastern Lake Eyre languages lie the Pitta-Pitta group (abbreviated Pp); these have been described by Blake 1979b (see also Breen 1971). East of the eastern Lake Eyre languages is the Wangkumarra group (abbreviated Wm). Data on these languages comes from Breen (n.d.) (see also Breen 1971, and Robertson 1984, 1985). Using the available data I have attempted to classify the languages of the Lake Eyre region and to establish reconstructions of putative ancestor languages. 3. Previous classifications of Lake Eyre Languages O’Grady, Voegelin and Voegelin 1966 and Wurm 1972 classify the eastern Lake Eyre languages as members of the “Dieric Group” of Pama-Nyungan. This group is divided further into three subgroups, the “Karna Subgroup”, the “Ngura Subgroup” and the “Yalyi Subgroup”. Other languages of the region are classified into the Arabanic, Mitakudic and Pitta-Pittic Groups of Pama-Nyungan. The internal classification of the Dieric Group is given by Wurm (1972:132-3) as follows:2 Karna Subgroup 1. Dieri - Tirari - Jandruwanta - Ngameni - Karangura - Yelyendi 2. Pilatapa 3. Jauaraworka (Jawaraworka) 4. Karendala — Kungadutji (Gungadidji) — Kulumali — Bidia — Murulta — Karuwali Ngura Subgroup 1 Punthamara — Ngandangara — Kalali (Garlali) — Bitjara? — Tereila? (Diraila?) — Wangkumara — Ngurawola 2. Badjiri (Badjara, Baddjeri) Yalyi Subgroup Nadikali - Malyangapa Breen 1971 is a major restudy of western Queensland languages using a large amount of newly collected data not available to previous researchers. The classification is primarily lexico-statistically based and Breen modifies the classification of O’Grady et a!, setting up a “Karnic Group” which (Breen 197 1:21): “comprises four subgroups: the Narla Sub-Group is the former Arabanic Group; the Palku Sub-Group is the former Pitta-Pittic Group; the Kama Sub-Group comprises the former Karna Sub-Group of Dieric, plus Mithaka, minus Bidia 2 The spelling of language names in Wurm 1972 is retained here. (Birria), Kungatutji, Kulumali and Karendala; the Ngura Sub-Group is the former Ngura Sub-Group plus Karendala.” As evidence of the relationship between members of this Karnic Group, Breen (1971:29) provides partial cognate counts for comparisons of languages across the group. The figures are in the range 20%-40% (if we ignore neighbouring languages where cognate counts could be artificially increased by borrowing), with a low of 19% (for Palku-Ngura subgroups) and a high of 48% (Karna-Palku, represented by Yarluyandi-Pitta-Pitta).